memel medal to show

[chris clark]

hope ok but just had the urge to post this piece which is in excellant state.

[chris clark]

rear

[Peter J.]

memel

Hi Chris.

Try an advanced search on "memellandes" and check out
Siegfred´s thread.

Regards
Peter

[Seigfried]

Hi Chris.

Try an advanced search on "memellandes" and check out
Siegfred´s thread.

Regards
Peter

Hi Peter,
I'm afraid that this is a fake - unfortunately I became something of a memelfreak after finding out that mine was a fake (and the same as this one!) and did lots of research into them. Check out my one - carefully!

John

[Airborne Nut]

Hi Chris, I just bought one like this not too long ago maybe 1 month. I showed it here and the reasons I got that it was "a known reproduction" was

1. The curvature of the "M" in the word "Memel" the "M" curves too much in the known fake and on the original the curvature is much less exaggerated.

2. and the the word "ERRENING" does not have the token bend to the arm of the "G", the fakes have a Straight arm on the "G" If you compare to the examples listed you will see what I am talking about.

3. you can also see subtle differences in the "2's"

These are the reasons I was given by very prominent collectors on this forum, so I wanted to share them with you.

Good Luck,

-SHane

[chris clark]

thanks for replies guys. oh well in the bin with this one. odd as i know where it came from. so this a fake to ????

[chris clark]

rear

[chris clark]

ok i just read the memellandes thread as there are loads of differing points of view what a fake and what not. as far as the piece i posted here as with the second medal both came from same source of which were a group of over 100 items of which all ok. so why should a fake get into the seized items which have been put away since the war???? i do not mean to upset the apple cart and take your views with interest but it sheds a light on are we wrong here with this one. on my thread " sorry had to show someone" these two pieces are of the same lot hence im confident with this piece and hence the debate goes on.

again sorry if any one offended that is not the reason im coming back with dought about the fake issues here i just feel strongly confident that this piece is ok and worth further discussion. i am not one to be obstructive or stubborn just feel strongly with this item if that makes sense

[Seigfried]

Hi Chis,
I'd take it back to the dealer if you can. If you've not had it too long and he is worth his salt he ought to give you a refund. The Oct 1 medal looks ok but I'm not sure about the 'full stop' after the 1 or the inner rim which is visible at the top of the reverse shot. If you read the other thread you'll see that I went through exactly the same as you when I first joined the forum. My Demjansk, Narvik, LW GAB, Memel and EK2 Spange were all duds! Thankfully I got most of my money back.

John

[chris clark]

thanks john. these were not from a dealer and i have no financial loss to myself.

[Seigfried]

Hi Chris,

I've just seen your reply as I was writing my own! The main thing is - if you are happy with the piece then that's all that counts - I just know that there are guys who've been around a lot longer than me and although they're not foolproof, they do seem to know what they're talking about and I joined the forum to learn.

Regards,

John

[TerryG]

Memel

I quite agree that there is still a lot of confusion about what makes these a fake or a good one. I attach a photo of mine, purchased recently from Detlev. As already stated, I suggest you look up a thread which brought quite a bit of interest a few weeks ago. You will see on there that one medal not too different from the one shown above was given the ok by Detlev.

[Tom Yanacek]

Hello Guys!

Could you please check out this Memel Medal. I have owned this one for about 8 years. I never doubted it's authenticity, but what do you guys have to say. Any opinions? Best regards! Tom Yanacek

[Tom Yanacek]

obverse closeup...

[Tom Yanacek]

reverse...